Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

Here is another place just listed (800k) at below its 2000 sale price (844k).http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/246-2nd-St-94105/unit-1403/home/847278
The whole country, and much of the world, had a 2003-2007 housing bubble, but SF and the greater Bay Area also had a 1997-2001 bubble before that. As has been noted, we’ve pretty much deflated that second bubble here in SF and the pertinent debate is whether, and how much, that first bubble will be deflated. If you talk in terms of real dollars, we’re already well into the dialing back of that first bubble too.
Who knows, but perhaps the owner of the 2nd street place finally got tired of subsidizing his/her tenant on this “investment” as the HOA and taxes alone are over $1500/mo and the $3295/mo rent probably leaves the owner short by about a thousand every single month.

They tried to sell 2312 Gough all last year for around 2.6. Then the bank took it and now it’s listed for 2.1.
I recall seeing that 40% of the listings from last year expired without a sale. That means 60 sold for every 40 that didn’t.
If half of the expired listings from last year come back as bank owned like this place, and the pace of sales remains the same (lower prices but higher interest rates), that means that 1/3 of the sales this year will be bank owned properties.
That’s what happened in San Diego, Sacramento and the Inland Valley. If that happens, it’s lights out for this market.
Should be a fun spring.

Speaking of A2A: Looks like 2552 Baker closed at 16% under it’s 2005 selling price. Someone may want to double check that info though.. Including property taxes, that’s a pretty major loss on that place.

Yeah, 2552 Baker looks like another over-half-million loss, back to the 2002 price (which is just about right for SF generally, although some places have done a bit better and some a bit worse).
And the Feb. 2005 sale was a couple years before the peak. On the plus side, that place looks very nice and is in a great location (coming from someone who is not a huge Pac Heights fan).

“I’ll bet his friends told him ‘Hold at least 10 years and you’ll be fine.'”
If they told him “buy in SF and your property will soon double in value!” they would have been right – up until 2007. But then the bubble popped and here we are back again at 2000. That’s how bubbles work. Even in SF.
But I think tipster is too conservative on the total loss vs. comparable rent. With $556/mo in HOAs, I’d say the 2000 buyer lost about $500-600/mo – closer to a $100,000 loss – over renting during the last decade.

Yeah, but tippy, just think how exciting it would have been in 2006 when his property value had just jumped yet another $50k and was rocketing up like a runaway freight train going to the moon!
Seriously, that would’ve been a great feeling you never would’ve gotten from renting.

@AT, great comp. And a great outcome. Buying quality in SF is going to give the best returns. Buying fringe and paying premium, (e.g., funston, gough, franklin, california) is not a winning strategy and certainly not in this market.